Literature DB >> 29124285

Kinematics and arthrokinematics in the chronic ACL-deficient knee are altered even in the absence of instability symptoms.

Chen Yang1,2, Yasutaka Tashiro1, Andrew Lynch3, Freddie Fu1, William Anderst4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To analyze the in vivo kinematics and arthrokinematics of chronic ACL-deficient (ACL-D) and unaffected contralateral knees during level walking and downhill running using dynamic biplane radiography. It was hypothesized that ACL-D knees would demonstrate increased anterior translation and internal rotation, and that ACL-deficiency would alter the tibiofemoral contact paths in comparison to the unaffected contralateral side.
METHODS: Eight participants with unilateral chronic ACL-D without instability symptoms were recruited. The contralateral unaffected knee was considered as control. Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grades were determined from ACL-D and unaffected knees. Dynamic knee motion was determined from footstrike through the early-stance phase (20-25% of gait cycle) using a validated volumetric model-based tracking process that matched subject-specific CT bone models to dynamic biplane radiographs. Participants performed level walking at 1.2 m/s and downhill running at 2.5 m/s while biplane radiographs were collected at 100 and 150 images per second, respectively. Tibiofemoral kinematics and arthrokinematics (the path of the closest contact point between articulating subchondral bone surfaces) were determined and compared between ACL-D and unaffected knees. A two-way repeated measures analysis of variance was used to identify differences between ACL-D and unaffected knees at 5% increments of the gait cycle.
RESULTS: Anterior-posterior translations were significantly larger in ACL-D than unaffected knees during level walking (all p < 0.001) and downhill running (all p ≤ 0.022). Internal rotation showed no significant difference between ACL-D and unaffected knees during level walking and downhill running. Closest contact points on the femur in ACL-D knees were consistently more anterior in the lateral compartment during downhill running (significant from 10 to 20% of the gait cycle, all p ≤ 0.044), but not during level walking. No differences in medial compartment contact paths were identified. Half of the participants had asymmetric K-L grades, with all having worse knee OA in the involved knee. Only 2 relatively young individuals had not progressed beyond stage 1 in either knee.
CONCLUSION: The results suggest that anterior translation and knee joint contact paths are altered in ACL-D knees even in the absence of instability symptoms. The clinical relevance is that ACL-D patients who do not report symptoms of instability likely still demonstrate altered knee kinematics and arthrokinematics compared to their uninvolved limb. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Case-control study, Level III.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anterior cruciate ligament; Arthrokinematics; Biplane radiography; In vivo; Kinematics

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29124285      PMCID: PMC5910211          DOI: 10.1007/s00167-017-4780-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  42 in total

1.  The 6 degrees of freedom kinematics of the knee after anterior cruciate ligament deficiency: an in vivo imaging analysis.

Authors:  Louis E Defrate; Ramprasad Papannagari; Thomas J Gill; Jeremy M Moses; Neil P Pathare; Guoan Li
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2006-04-24       Impact factor: 6.202

2.  Alterations in three-dimensional joint kinematics of anterior cruciate ligament-deficient and -reconstructed knees during walking.

Authors:  Bo Gao; Naiquan Nigel Zheng
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2009-12-14       Impact factor: 2.063

3.  Gait changes of the ACL-deficient knee 3D kinematic assessment.

Authors:  B Shabani; D Bytyqi; S Lustig; L Cheze; C Bytyqi; P Neyret
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-07-16       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Anterior cruciate ligament deficiency alters the in vivo motion of the tibiofemoral cartilage contact points in both the anteroposterior and mediolateral directions.

Authors:  Guoan Li; Jeremy M Moses; Ramprasad Papannagari; Neil P Pathare; Louis E DeFrate; Thomas J Gill
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  A joint coordinate system for the clinical description of three-dimensional motions: application to the knee.

Authors:  E S Grood; W J Suntay
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 2.097

6.  Gait adaptation in chronic anterior cruciate ligament-deficient patients: Pivot-shift avoidance gait.

Authors:  Alexandre Fuentes; Nicola Hagemeister; Pierre Ranger; Timothy Heron; Jacques A de Guise
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2010-10-20       Impact factor: 2.063

7.  Rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament injury influences joint loading during walking but not hopping.

Authors:  M A Risberg; H Moksnes; A Storevold; I Holm; L Snyder-Mackler
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2009-03-08       Impact factor: 13.800

8.  The inaccuracy of surface-measured model-derived tibiofemoral kinematics.

Authors:  Kang Li; Liying Zheng; Scott Tashman; Xudong Zhang
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2012-09-08       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  A 10-year prospective trial of a patient management algorithm and screening examination for highly active individuals with anterior cruciate ligament injury: Part 1, outcomes.

Authors:  Wendy J Hurd; Michael J Axe; Lynn Snyder-Mackler
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2007-10-16       Impact factor: 6.202

10.  Effect of Posterior Horn Medial Meniscus Root Tear on In Vivo Knee Kinematics.

Authors:  Chelsea A Marsh; Daniel E Martin; Christopher D Harner; Scott Tashman
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2014-07-11
View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Current trends in the anterior cruciate ligament part 1: biology and biomechanics.

Authors:  Volker Musahl; Ehab M Nazzal; Gian Andrea Lucidi; Rafael Serrano; Jonathan D Hughes; Fabrizio Margheritini; Stefano Zaffagnini; Freddie H Fu; Jon Karlsson
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-12-20       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Operative and nonoperative management of anterior cruciate ligament injury: Differences in gait biomechanics at 5 years.

Authors:  Elizabeth Wellsandt; Ashutosh Khandha; Jacob Capin; Thomas S Buchanan; Lynn Snyder-Mackler
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2020-03-20       Impact factor: 3.494

3.  Effect of an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture on Knee Proprioception Within 2 Years After Conservative and Operative Treatment: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  John Dick Fleming; Ramona Ritzmann; Christoph Centner
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 11.928

4.  Effect of Time After Injury on Tibiofemoral Joint Kinematics in Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Deficient Knees During Gait.

Authors:  Changzhao Li; Yulin Lin; Willem A Kernkamp; Hong Xia; Zefeng Lin
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2022-07-21

5.  Clinical and Functional Outcomes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction at a Minimum of 2 Years Using Adjustable Suspensory Fixation in Both the Femur and Tibia: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Philippe Colombet; Mo Saffarini; Nicolas Bouguennec
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2018-10-22

6.  Dynamic Radiostereometry Evaluation of 2 Different Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Techniques During a Single-Leg Squat.

Authors:  Stefano Di Paolo; Piero Agostinone; Alberto Grassi; Gian Andrea Lucidi; Erika Pinelli; Marco Bontempi; Gregorio Marchiori; Laura Bragonzoni; Stefano Zaffagnini
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2021-07-15
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.